About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
they considered draconian cuts, harry reid and mitch mcconnell said there's a select committee that will spread the cuts all over, you know, over evenly, and that didn't happen, bottom line is, listen, this has been up for a year, and i, and others said, let's get to it, get to it, and they did everything but this. they are on vacation now. they should have come back last week if it's that important. it doesn't get down. i hope i'm wrong, but people are depending on a type of certainty and stability. lou: interesting difference of view in the republican party. speaker boehner in his op-ed this week acknowledges that there would be significant disruptions as a result of sequester going into effect, yet, most of the republican parties say this is what we need, see spending cuts, need to take if on even if it's across the board and arbitrary. there is a real division right now working the republican party apparently; is that right? >> i have not heard so much let's just make the cuts and about it. i'm in the pentagon. i'll serve next week again, and i'm working in the national guard bureau, and th
's in charge and harry reid in charge of the senate. you'd thought we're in charge of everything, apparently. we're not. the president needs to show adership. the house already sent forth proposals, sitting on harry reid's desk, he's done absolutely nothing to bring this to a head. he'll put a bill up with a great title, went be what we want and force you to do it, and, by the way, blame the republicans when it doesn't happen, and then they get to it after, obviously, the march 1 #st deadline. lou: military pay will not be affected by sequester. there's the prospect of possible rolling furloughs, one day a week, several effects that civilian employees, a great number of them in the rollg fiduciary row situation, if it does, in fact, occur. the idea of a sequester turns out to have been -- it seems to me, a monumental misjudgment on the part of both parties and the president, and i can't believe we are sitting here march 1st, and neither the republica or the leadership says this is a stupid idea, and the only people with the power to correct a massively ignorant device we created, and the rep
. ashley: in separate interviews sunday, both president obama and harry reid called for more revenue, only meaning one thing, higher taxes. this, of course, comes on the heels of an unexpected economic contraction in the fourth quarter and a rise in the unemployment rate. joining me now, fox news' senior judicial analyst. >> smiling because i'm happy to be here, but hard to smile with more taxes. didn't we just give him all the taxes he asked for a month or so ago? this is a mentality that believes in redistricting wealth. we're seeing the president at his most progressive capital "p" as jfk and woodrow wilson after the inaugural address. seems to me and those who watch this for a living that he's determined to imprint a big government brand of government into the fabric of federal law, even more than he attempted to do in the first administration. tracy: to call taxes slavery, that leads people to believe they don't have to pay them. >> if you believe the only legitimate commercial transaction is a voluntary one, then you can argue that taxes are theft and slavery because it's -- i'm not
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)